Transliteracy, Participatory Media, Political Movement, Kony 2012

Assignment 2 Stack on delicious: Transliteracy,Participatory Media, Political Movement, Kony 2012

My stack in Delicious is driven from the Kony2012 video. Its Web 2.0 response is prolific and has engaged the public sphere and experts alike. While the video’s intent was to move the powers at hand to “Capture Kony”, its unintended consequences are a participatory media onslaught that has engaged its participants to align, assess, and critique the movement under a political, social, and economic lens. It provides an opportunity to see both transliteracy and participatory media unfold under a movement drawing immediate global response.

My first posting is included as an “extra”. SueLampert (NNM blog, 2012) kindly pointed me to Guardian openjournalism: Three Little Pigs advert – video in her response to my posting on transliteracy. The advert framed under the “Three Little Pigs” fable demonstrates transliteracy in action through a succinct interweaving of a variety of narratives (print media, cell phone, video, twitter, YouTube). It is the unfolding of unintended consequences under the guise of a well-known story, and the public’s reactions and the interpretations by those considered the experts with a surprise outcome.

The Kony 2012: what's the real story? , my first assignment two posting, is the actualization of ThreeLittle Pigs advert imagined transliteracy event. The webpage is an excellent example of participatory media in action. Its is a transliteracy aggregation of public and expert postings of YouTube videos, written comments, and articles that address themes around the video, its creator, its over simplification of the political situation, potential concerns about misinformation of Kony’s actual location as well as the video’s potential to negatively impact the social and economic state Uganda. This page represents N. K. Hayles’ (2007, p.187) concept of the hyper attention cognitive style – that desire to switch focus rapidly among different tasks, preferring multiple information streams, seeking a high level of stimulation, and having a low tolerance for boredom. Its robust information presentation takes the viewer at pace from one theme to the next.

I was both intrigued and overwhelmed by the enormity of the content in the Kony 2012: what's the real story? However, I had the good fortune of tuning into CBC’s “Q” airing of  “Kony 2012: Is simplification a necessary partof successful advocacy?” This post cast, my second assignment two posting, is a debate between World Bank social media strategist Teddy Ruge and National Post columnist Matt Gurney and spoke to me as an example of Hayles (2007, p.187) deep media experience (and my engrained cognitive style) as it concentrates on a single media focus to provide a deeper understanding. It caught me at the right place at the right time - in the car listening to the radio, unable to be drawn away by other narrative forms - and allowed me to zero in on the content presented to better situate the many narratives presented in the Kony 2012 dialogue.

  

This verbal narrative is the debate of two that breaks down the Kony 2012 video, its themes, and their respective successes and challenges. It speaks to manipulating the masses and how the creator has been able to drive participatory media movement in ways that no other advocacy group has been able to do. It draws a parallel to the 80s political narrative of “Band Aid” but also allows voice to where Uganda is at – despite Kony’s impact. In summary, it is an “all in one” opportunity to grasp the impact of the Kony 2012 video in a uni-dimensional, concentrated narrative.

After having reviewed these two representations of the Kony 2012 event, I was moved to find an academic explanation of political movement and social media. My research led me to my final assignment two posting, "From Virtual Public Spheres to Global Justice: A Critical Theory of Internetworked Social Movements" (Langman, 2005). In his paper, Dr. Lauren Langman, a professor in the Department of Sociology at Loyola University of Chicago, posits that “the electronic networks that made contemporary globalization possible also led to the emergence of ‘‘virtual public spheres’’ and, in turn, ‘‘Internetworked Social Movements’’(p. 44)”. This led me to delve into his examination of social media theory and the Frankfurt school of thought to see if I could better flush the process of political mobilization through participatory media.

The paper examples a variety of narratives used across time for political mobilization and speaks to participatory organization through the clever use of electronic media. I interpret Langman’s main intent as the presentation of the function the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory to consider the role of literacy and media in fostering participatory movement to offer a “contemporary framework in which legitimacy crises are discussed and participants arrive at consensual truth claims; in this process, new forms of empowered, activist identities are fostered and negotiated that impel cyber activism” (Langman, 2005, p.44).

The paper is lengthy and full of valuable content. I did seek initially to find one or two pages to draw link to the concepts of transliteracy and participatory media. Frankly, I surmised that its reading in entirety provides political/transliteracy insight into past narratives practices as well as those unfolding in though new media much like Sue Lampert presented in her transliteracy lecture. In light of the three previous postings, this thought stood out:

The mediations between injustice and adversity, which are often far removed from personal experience, and actual participation in a social movement depend on a number of factors: (1) information and the way it is framed; (2) a personal identity that is receptive to this information; (3) a structural location conducive to activism; and (4) linkages or ties with networks of social actors with similar concerns. (Langman, 2005, p. 52)

In the case of the Kony 2012 video, I see that its ability to draw a viral transliteracy response arises from an extremely well created narrative that captures the masses and the experts equally in a manner that compels both to sound in. Participatory media is the ubiquitous mechanism that aggregates these many narratives.

I’ve said enough – hopefully, this provides a snapshot of the transliteracy, its actualization in both a hyper and deep cognitive style, and a complementary academic approach to draw all aspects together. 

Over and out,

LJ

 

Transliteracy,Participatory Media, Political Movement, Kony 2012

References

Hayles, N. (2007). Hyper and Deep Attention: The Generational Divide in Cognitive Modes. Profession, 187-199. doi:10.1632/prof.2007.2007.1.187

Langman, L. (2005). From Virtual Public Spheres to Global Justice: A Critical Theory of Internetworked Social Movements. Sociological Theory, 23(1), 42-74.

The New Open Source Economics - Assignment 2, Text 2

In the TED Talk The New Open Source Economics, Yochai Benkler, Berkman Professor of Entrepreneurial Legal Studies at Harvard, contrasts earlier economic models with the economic model emerging in this era of collaborative production. In previous eras, the capital required to produce goods created a division between producers and consumers. Benkler argues that this model is outdated in today's information society, in which most members of society possess the basic capital needed to be a producer: a connected computer. He offers examples of amateurs who analyze NASA images, open source programmers, and Wikipedia editors, all of whom contribute their time and skills for a variety of rewards - all of which are non-monetary. Benkler argues that this kind of collaborative production - which involves decentralized networks and non-monetary reward - occupies a new economic niche.

Benkler points out that this is the first time in history that work for non-monetary reward is having a major economic impact, as seen in the recording, software, and communication industries. He raises the concern that this new model is threatening to corporations which rely on existing economic models, and that those threatened will seek means to restrict the tools of collaborative production. Benkler's prediction can be seen borne out to some degree in the efforts to pass the SOPA and PIPA bills in the US. Participatory media sites Wikipedia and Reddit were among those who played a pivotal role in having the bills halted in Congress (Mail Online, 2012). This suggests to me that the new economic model Benkler describes has reached critical mass: participatory media are now so valued that society recognizes the need to protect the tools of collaborative production.

Delicious stack for the three texts I've chosen.

References

Benkler, Y. (2008). Yochai Benkler: The New Open Source Economics.

[Video file]. Retrieved from: http://www.ted.com/talks/yochai_benkler_on_the_new_open_source_economics.html

Mail Online. (2012). Wikipedia protest hits home: U.S. senators withdraw support for anti-piracy bills as 4.5 million sign petition. Mail Online. Retrieved from:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087673/Wikipedia-blackout-SOPA-protest-US-senators-withdraw-support-anti-piracy-bills.html

Jenkins and the onus to participate

I happened to leaf through a recent Maclean's magazine this week, shortly after listening to Jenkins' talk. It contained letters to the editor in response to a Feb. 20 article called "Stop lecturing students", which discussed the future of the lecture-based model of education. While one letter writer stated the view that universities should move away from lectures toward other, more engaging teaching models, another writer argued that universities should not pander to the whims of Gen Y, which "wants to do the least amount of work possible for the highest payout".

It was interesting to come across these opposing views in light of having just listened to Jenkins' discussion of the digital immigrant / digital native construct, particularly his point that when adults accept the role of the non-literate "immigrant", they forfeit responsibility for helping young people navigate today's complex media environment. Jenkins points out the areas that adults might be able to provide guidance in, such as addressing the participation gap and "hidden curriculum", developing ethics for the online environment, and developing a critical language around use of new communication tools.

Before listening to Jenkins' talk, I hadn't thought much about there being an onus on adults to help children find their way safely with technology, but I take Jenkins' point about the value of involvement, as opposed to the restrictive surveillance that is a common adult response to their children's immersion in online environments. The way to really protect children from the pitfalls of online environments is for their parents and teachers to understand those environments - which can only come from their own involvement, not from building walls.

Clay Shirky likens the current media revolution to that of the early era of the printing press, in which "old institutions seemed exhausted while new ones seemed untrustworthy; as a result, people almost literally didn’t know what to think." If we are in the midst of such a revolution, that would help to explain the discomfort that some "digital immigrants" feel about the shifting media landscape. The new platforms still feel untrustworthy, and things won't settle for some time yet. But, as Jenkins points out, it's exactly our lack of understanding of how new media behave that makes it imperative for adults to step forward and provide guidance to younger people who don't remember a pre-Internet world.

Rheingold offers a particularly good call-to-arms statement on the need to develop new media literacy, immigrant or not: "The more people who know how to use participatory media to learn, inform, persuade, investigate, reveal, advocate and organize, the more likely the future infosphere will allow, enable and encourage liberty and participation."

MacDonald, S. (2012). Attention please [Letter]. Maclean's, March 5, 2012.

Rheingold, H. (N.d.). Participative Pedagogy for a Literacy of Literacies [Blog post]. Retrieved from: http://freesouls.cc/essays/03-howard-rheingold-participative-pedagogy-for-a-literacy-of-literacies.html

Shirky, C. (2009). Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable [Blog post]. Retrieved from: http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2009/03/newspapers-and-thinking-the-unthinkable/

Week 7: Participatory Literacies

Week 7: Participatory Literacies

As Howard Rheingold notes, “a participatory culture in which most of the population see themselves as creators as well as consumers of culture is far more likely to generate freedom and wealth for more people than one in which a small portion of the population produces culture that the majority passively consume.”

Some key ideas for this week:

• according to recent studies by the Pew Center on the Internet and American Life, more than half of American teens online have produced media content and about a third have circulated media that they have produced beyond their immediate friends and family. 
• growing importance of participatory culture in the everyday lives of young people. Work across a range of disciplines suggest that these emerging forms of participatory culture are important sites for informal learning and may be the crucible out of which new conceptions of civic engagement are emerging. 
• the next techno-cultural shift according to Rheingold
• collective intelligence

Q1: Participatory media culture and the role of the audience

I work in the Marketing and Communications (MarCom) department at a university. A more participatory media culture affects MarCom's work in a number of ways. Because of informal, participatory communication channels such as Facebook, Twitter, and blogs, the university can no longer tightly control what is published about it. MarCom has had to expand its role from publisher to listener.

Official publications such as magazines mailed out to alumni and “what’s going on at the university” columns in local newspapers are now a smaller part of the media landscape than they used to be. While these traditional channels might still attract the eyes of one important audience (alumni and other community supporters), the key audience of students and prospective students is more likely to be looking at student-run pages on Facebook. It’s become more difficult for the university to maintain an authoritative “voice” and to control the flow of information and commentary published about the university.

The university’s media officer still prepares press releases and liaises with traditional media. However, her role now includes much more “ear to the ground” work than it used to, because of the proliferation of informal communication channels in which the university is mentioned.

A new example of an informal channel cropped up yesterday. A student – or group of students – has started a “memes” page about the institution on Facebook. Students create LOLcat-style memes on memegenerator.net, and then post them to Facebook. The memes page has generated quite a following, and MarCom has realized that it’s worth watching the page, as it reflects not only undergraduate culture at the university but also student concerns and frustrations about the institution. Along with such predictable memes as “10 minute class break = 20 minute pub break!” there is some very clever and pointed satire about issues at the university such as the lack of certain program offerings, parking woes, and the cost of food services on campus.

A Facebook page such as this cannot be controlled by the university, but can carry as much weight with key audiences – or more – than anything the university itself publishes. The audience is creating content that is more relevant to itself than what the institution creates. As O’Reilly (2005) points out, “The world of Web 2.0 is also the world of what Dan Gilmor calls ‘we, the media,’ a world in which “the former audience”, not a few people in a back room, decides what’s important” (p. 3).

The "few people in a back room" that Gilmor refers to sounds like what MarCom's role used to be. Now, MarCom's role includes being in the audience, listening to what is being said about the institution in Web 2.0 channels, as well as spearheading its own Web 2.0 efforts in order to maintain an official voice in as many communication channels as possible.

O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0. Retrieved February 10, 2012, from http://oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html?page=3

Q1. Participatory Media

Not being well versed in theories around the roles of the audience, I spent some time reading up on it and found that Katz, Blulmer, Gurevitch’s (1973) Uses & Gratifications theory does well to address the relationship between audience and text in new media technologies (NMT). www.mediaknowall.com summaries Blulmer and Katz’s work to four audience/text purposes:

• Diversion - escape from everyday problems and routine.
• Personal Relationships - using the media for emotional and other interaction, eg) substituting soap operas for family life
• Personal Identity - finding yourself reflected in texts, learning behaviour and values from texts
• Surveillance - Information which could be useful for living eg) weather reports, financial news, holiday bargains

On a personal note, I can easily find myself using NMT within these purposes. I look NMTs like twitter as a diversion when killing time, to see what’s up, Google to help direct my search for support when creating class lectures or support for seed questions. Upon occasion, I see something I “like” in my traverses.  Also get the sense that people use NMT such as Facebook a more “one-stop-shop” for all four purposes - diversion, personal relationships, identity, and surveillance. Youtube is excellent for diversion but less so for personal relationships. Wikipedia in its entirety would present an opportunity for all four as well – diversion when bored (read, create, edit, or comment on pages), develop relationship to those creators behind the scenes, to new users as the comes in to add content, create an identity within the culture, draw out new things from the viewing of diverse pages.

How have new media technologies resulted in a more participatory media culture? Simply put, NMT provides the opportunity by its ability to provide access to the masses and for contribution from the masses. Gone are the days of only specialist publishing (the scribes, the telegraph employees, the book publishers) transformed by NMT to a world where Epictetus', Greek Stoic philosopher, words can be actualized by and for the masses "If you wish to be a writer, write". 

With the prolific nature of Web 2.0, I would say that it has increase the number of eyeballs and the number of contributions but not necessarily the quality of the contributions.  What I mean here is that much of what exists in NMT makes me think of Metcalfe’s Law is a redirect: that retweet of someone’s work, an article with a link to a great video, a new study, a new interview, a like or dislike thumbs up/down, a comment in response to presented ideas…

However, I think this is all relative - I am thinking of Pareto’s “80/20” law…

-       Of the audience, 80% are the are readers, 20% are participatory

-       Of the 20% “participatory”, 80% are “reposters”, 20% are content generators

-       Of the 20% content generators, 80% are reworking already established ideas (ie newspaper articles, Wikipedia content adders) 20% are creating  orginal content.  

In a nutshell, I think NMT is further reaching - but this is relative across the level of participation...  I propose it remains in a constant 80/20 balance.

References

Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). USES AND GRATIFICATIONS RESEARCH. Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509.

No author. (n.d). Key Concepts in Media Studies. In http://www.mediaknowall.com. Retrieved February 9, 2012, from http://www.mediaknowall.com/as_alevel/alevkeyconcepts/alevelkeycon.php?pageID=audience.